Re: Sorting on mutivalued fields still impossible?

2013-01-07 Thread Uwe Reh
Hi Jack, thank you for the hint. Since I have already a solrj client to do the preprocessing, mapping to sort fields isn't my problem. I will try to explain better in my reply to Erick. Uwe (Sorry late reaction) Am 30.08.2012 16:04, schrieb Jack Krupansky: You can also use a Field

Re: Sorting on mutivalued fields still impossible?

2013-01-07 Thread Uwe Reh
Am 31.08.2012 13:35, schrieb Erick Erickson: ... what would the correct behavior be for sorting on a multivalued field Hi Erick, in generally you are right, the question of multivalued fields is which value the reference is. But there are thousands of cases where this question is implicit

Re: Sorting on mutivalued fields still impossible?

2013-01-07 Thread Alexandre Rafalovitch
If the Multiple-to-one mapping would be stable (e.g. independent of a query), why not implement it as a custom update.chain processor with a copy to a separate field? There is already a couple of implementations under FieldValueMutatingUpdateProcessor (first, last, max, min). Regards, Alex.

Re: Sorting on mutivalued fields still impossible?

2013-01-07 Thread Uwe Reh
Hi, like I just wrote in my reply to the similar suggestion form Jack. I'm not looking for a way to preprocess my data. My question is, why do i need two redundant fields to sort a multivalued field ('date_max' and 'date_min' for 'date') For me it's just a waste of space, poisoning the

Re: Sorting on mutivalued fields still impossible?

2013-01-07 Thread Chris Hostetter
: My question is, why do i need two redundant fields to sort a multivalued field : ('date_max' and 'date_min' for 'date') : For me it's just a waste of space, poisoning the fieldcache. how does two fields poion the fieldcache ? ... if there was a function that could find the min or max value of

Re: Sorting on mutivalued fields still impossible?

2012-09-10 Thread Toke Eskildsen
On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 06:55 +0200, Erick Erickson wrote: I may prefer the first, and you may prefer the second. Neither is necessarily more correct IMO, it depends on the problem space. Choosing either one will be unpopular with anyone who likes the other Sorry, I did not make myself

Re: Sorting on mutivalued fields still impossible?

2012-09-06 Thread Erick Erickson
And you've illustrated my viewpoint I think by saying two obvious choices. I may prefer the first, and you may prefer the second. Neither is necessarily more correct IMO, it depends on the problem space. Choosing either one will be unpopular with anyone who likes the other And I suspect that

Re: Sorting on mutivalued fields still impossible?

2012-09-05 Thread Toke Eskildsen
On Fri, 2012-08-31 at 13:35 +0200, Erick Erickson wrote: Imagine you have two entries, aardvark and emu in your multiValued field. How should that document sort relative to another doc with camel and zebra? Any heuristic you apply will be wrong for someone else I see two obvious choices

Re: Sorting on mutivalued fields still impossible?

2012-08-31 Thread Erick Erickson
In addition to Jack's comment, what would the correct behavior be for sorting on a multivalued field? The reason this is disallowed is because there is no correct behavior in the general case. Imagine you have two entries, aardvark and emu in your multiValued field. How should that document sort

Re: Sorting on mutivalued fields still impossible?

2012-08-30 Thread Jack Krupansky
@lucene.apache.org Subject: Sorting on mutivalued fields still impossible? Hi, just to be sure. There is still no way to sort by multivalued fields? ...sort=max(datefield) desc There is no smarter option, than creating additional singelevalued fields just for sorting? eg. datafield_max

Sorting on mutivalued fields still impossible?

2012-08-29 Thread Uwe Reh
Hi, just to be sure. There is still no way to sort by multivalued fields? ...sort=max(datefield) desc There is no smarter option, than creating additional singelevalued fields just for sorting? eg. datafield_max and datefield_min Uwe